One comment on the movie "Glory" suggested that James Montgomery's and
Robert Shaw's actions had been accurately portrayed. In the sense that
the two characters reflected two sharp divisions over how war should be
conducted, I believe that is true, but the movie is, I think, too simple
in its stereotypes. Montgomery was far more complicated than he appears in
"Glory" where he seems to be nothing more than a plunderer and looter with no
ideals - a foil for the honorable path to death as represented by the noble
sentiments of Shaw. Montgomery, a Campbellite minister, had been tempered
into a "terrible, swift sword" by his experiences in Kansas as a lieutenant
for John Brown. He was a dedicated abolitionist unlike R. Shaw. He and
Harriet Tubman, the intelligence "officer" for the 2nd S.C. Vols, USCI, led
raids aimed at bringing slaves to freedom and at destroying the enemy's
ability to resist (Sherman before Sherman?). In the raid on Darien, GA,
depicted in the movie, Montgomery did have the town torched against the
remonstrances of Shaw, but Montgomery is portrayed as hostile toward his
own soldiers. I think that is inaccurate. Montgomery was as much of an
idealist as Shaw was; he had much less interest in having his soldiers
(and perhaps himself) killed to prove themselves.
I've used "Glory" in the classroom a number of times. Students love the
film as a powerful expression of hope but question the need to prove oneself
in war through battle death. Some point out that African-Americans had
"proved themselves" by dying for their country in the American Revolution and
the War of 1812.
Finally, one question I posed in advance of the showing of the film was
whether or not students perceived any stereotypes in the characters in the
film. Among those who students thought were stereotyped were 1. Thomas, the
weak ineffective intellectual 2. Trip, the urban rebel filled with rage
3. the naive but lovable squirrel hunter sharpshooter 4. Sarge
(Morgan Freeman) - wise from experience 5. all officers with the rank
of General 6. the Irish topkick. We all thought the scene at the pond
between Shaw and Trip was hokie, and the special effects at the ending
distracted from the reality of a fierce, fighting death in glory.
Was the message of the movie not also an indictment of the insanity of
sending mass attacks against a fortified foe, a message that was sent so
often during the Civil War that one must wonder why it had to be learned
again and again and again.
Lou Athey
(l_athey@acad.fandm.edu)